09.02.2014 Views

Agent of Democracy - Society for College and University Planning

Agent of Democracy - Society for College and University Planning

Agent of Democracy - Society for College and University Planning

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The Limits <strong>of</strong> Public Work:<br />

A Critical Reflection on<br />

the “Engaged <strong>University</strong>”<br />

Mary Stanley<br />

This chapter is dedicated to the late Manfred Stanley,<br />

dear husb<strong>and</strong>, trusted colleague, <strong>and</strong> love <strong>of</strong> my life,<br />

whose own work is my model <strong>of</strong> humane scholarship.<br />

Peter Levine’s tale <strong>of</strong> two generations <strong>of</strong> scholars is one framework<br />

<strong>for</strong> introducing the reader to the Higher Education Exchange.<br />

It’s a good analysis <strong>of</strong> the whys, hows, <strong>and</strong> whos behind HEX. Levine’s<br />

tale, like any ef<strong>for</strong>t to summarize a complex intellectual or activist<br />

“movement,” is necessarily incomplete. Given its focus, it does not<br />

address several deeply contentious <strong>and</strong> publicly known troubles<br />

vexing higher education during the period that HEX emerged <strong>and</strong><br />

solidified a perspective on scholarship, the role <strong>of</strong> higher education<br />

in a democracy <strong>and</strong> the nature <strong>of</strong> democracy.<br />

Of course a volume such as this will present many opportunities<br />

to explore those troubles as has HEX itself over the years <strong>of</strong> its<br />

publication. My perspective on the environment in higher education<br />

during the HEX years differs from Levine’s in two ways.<br />

First, I disagree with his implied assertion that the public<br />

sphere must privilege open-ended intellectual pluralism. Openness<br />

to ideas as described by Levine, suggests to me that more theoretically<br />

coherent or ideologically in<strong>for</strong>med perspectives (or some<br />

theoretically in<strong>for</strong>med perspectives) are not welcome or are troubling<br />

in the public sphere. To that I take issue. I would argue the contrary,<br />

which given the scale <strong>of</strong> problems the public must confront, pragmatic<br />

openness is simply inadequate. There are historical moments<br />

when big abstract theories are required. No, not utopian claims or<br />

closed ideologies uncoupled from experience but big ideas that<br />

require a certain level <strong>of</strong> intellectual clarity, necessary abstraction,<br />

sustained critical analysis, <strong>and</strong> transparency in terms <strong>of</strong> how power<br />

might give unwarranted credence to some ideas recasting them as<br />

common sense, while undermining others as “un-American.”<br />

29

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!